Here kitty-kitty: lure choice for predator attraction in a temperate environment
Alexandra J. Paton
A * , Barry W. Brook A B and Jessie C. Buettel A B
A
B
Abstract
Camera traps have become a crucial tool for monitoring predators and are frequently deployed with lures to boost detection. Feral cats, a problematic invasive species in Australia, are commonly monitored using camera traps with lures. Despite the additional effort required for lure deployment, it remains unclear which lures are effective for monitoring feral cats.
Our study aimed to address this knowledge gap and assess the impact of various lure treatments on feral cat detection and activity. We also examined the response of other predators, such as Tasmanian devils and spotted-tailed quolls, to the lures and explored how their activity influenced feral cat visitation.
We deployed food, olfactory and visual lures, along with a null treatment across four grids of 16 camera traps over a period of 4 months in south-eastern Tasmania.
We observed increased feral cat detection with food (odds ratio = 3.69, 97.5% CI = 1.04, 13.2) and visual lures (odds ratio = 5.95, CI = 1.75, 20.2), but not olfactory lures (odds ratio = 1.88, CI = 0.55, 6.51). Examining only sites where cats were detected, food (odds ratio = 3.35, CI = 1.27, 8.9), visual (odds ratio = 3.39, CI = 1.41, 8.1) and olfactory (odds ratio = 2.7, CI = 1.02, 7.1) lures all increased feral cat visitation to the camera traps. Tasmanian devil and spotted-tailed quoll activity increased 4.85-fold (CI = 2.89, 8.1) and 4.94-fold (CI = 2.92, 8.4) when using the food lure, and 4.24-fold (CI = 2.5, 7.2) and 3.49-fold (CI = 2.03, 6.0) when using the olfactory lure. Whereas a positive relationship existed between devil and cat activity overall (β = 0.49, s.e. = 0.15, P ≤ 0.001), negative associations were found between devil and cat activity in the presence of food (β = −0.36, s.e. = 0.19, P = 0.057) and olfactory (β = −0.42, s.e. = 0.20, P = 0.026) lures.
Our findings demonstrated the effectiveness of lures in temperate environments for feral cat monitoring but highlighted potential interspecific interactions that reduce feral cat visitation.
We recommend a thoughtful consideration of the environment and resident species to ensure effective lure use and to minimise unintended negative influences on the capture of target species.
Keywords: attractant, behaviour, Dasyurus maculatus, invasive, rainforest, remote-sensing, Sarcophilus harrisii, trail camera.
References
Andersen GE, Johnson CN, Jones ME (2016) Sympatric predator odour reveals a competitive relationship in size-structured mammalian carnivores. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70, 1831-1841.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Apps P, McNutt JW (2018) Are camera traps fit for purpose? A rigorous, reproducible and realistic test of camera trap performance. African Journal of Ecology 56, 710-720.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, Walker S (2015) Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1), 1-48.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bengsen A, Butler J, Masters P (2011) Estimating and indexing feral cat population abundances using camera traps. Wildlife Research 38, 732-739.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Cunningham CX, Johnson CN, Jones ME (2020) A native apex predator limits an invasive mesopredator and protects native prey: Tasmanian devils protecting bandicoots from cats. Ecology Letters 23, 711-721.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Curveira-Santos G, Sutherland C, Santos-Reis M, Swanepoel LH (2021) Responses of carnivore assemblages to decentralized conservation approaches in a South African landscape. Journal of Applied Ecology 58, 92-103.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Edwards GP, Piddington KC, Paltridge RM (1997) Field evaluation of olfactory lures for feral cats (Felis catus L.) in central Australia. Wildlife Research 24, 173-183.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Fancourt BA (2016) Avoiding the subject: the implications of avoidance behaviour for detecting predators. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 70, 1535-1546.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Fancourt BA, Hawkins CE, Cameron EZ, Jones ME, Nicol SC (2015) Devil declines and catastrophic cascades: is mesopredator release of feral cats inhibiting recovery of the eastern quoll? PLoS ONE 10, e0119303.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Fidino M, Barnas GR, Lehrer EW, Murray MH, Magle SB (2020) Effect of lure on detecting mammals with camera traps. Wildlife Society Bulletin 44, 543-552.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Fielding MW, Cunningham CX, Buettel JC, Stojanovic D, Yates LA, Jones ME, Brook BW (2022) Dominant carnivore loss benefits native avian and invasive mammalian scavengers. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 289, 20220521.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Goldingay RL (2024) The influence of bait and camera type on detection of a spectrum of medium-sized Australian mammals. Australian Mammalogy 46, AM23020.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hamer RP, Gardiner RZ, Proft KM, Johnson CN, Jones ME (2021) A triple threat: high population density, high foraging intensity and flexible habitat preferences explain high impact of feral cats on prey. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 288, 20201194.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hamer RP, Andersen GE, Hradsky BA, Troy SN, Gardiner RZ, Johnson CN, Jones ME (2022) Differing effects of productivity on home-range size and population density of a native and an invasive mammalian carnivore. Wildlife Research 49, 158-168.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Helmstedt KJ, Shaw JD, Bode M, Terauds A, Springer K, Robinson SA, Possingham HP (2016) Prioritizing eradication actions on islands: it’s not all or nothing. Journal of Applied Ecology 53, 733-741.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hofmeester TR, Rowcliffe JM, Jansen PA (2017) A simple method for estimating the effective detection distance of camera traps. Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation 3, 81-89.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Jones ME, Paetkau D, Geffen E, Moritz C (2004) Genetic diversity and population structure of Tasmanian devils, the largest marsupial carnivore. Molecular Ecology 13, 2197-2209.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Kays R, Arbogast BS, Baker-Whatton M, Beirne C, Boone HM, Bowler M, Burneo SF, Cove MV, Ding P, Espinosa S, et al. (2020) An empirical evaluation of camera trap study design: how many, how long and when? Methods in Ecology and Evolution 11, 700-713.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Kompas T, Chu L, Van Ha P, Spring D (2019) Budgeting and portfolio allocation for biosecurity measures. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 63, 412-438.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Lavelle MJ, Snow NP, Fischer JW, Halseth JM, VanNatta EH, VerCauteren KC (2017) Attractants for wild pigs: current use, availability, needs, and future potential. European Journal of Wildlife Research 63, 86.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Lazenby BT, Dickman CR (2013) Patterns of detection and capture are associated with cohabiting predators and prey. PLoS ONE 8, e59846.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Lohr CA, Nilsson K, Johnson A, Pittway B, Hamilton N, Onus M, Algar D (2024) Lures change the detectability of feral cats on the arid landscape. Biological Invasions 26, 817-828.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Meek PD, Ballard G-A, Vernes K, Fleming PJS (2015) The history of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Australian Mammalogy 37, 1-12.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Molsher RL (2001) Trapping and demographics of feral cats (Felis catus) in central New South Wales. Wildlife Research 28, 631-636.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Moseby KE, Selfe R, Freeman A (2004) Attraction of auditory and olfactory lures to feral cats, red foxes, European rabbits and burrowing bettongs. Ecological Management & Restoration 5, 228-231.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Nichols M, Ross J, Glen AS, Paterson AM (2019) An evaluation of systematic versus strategically-placed camera traps for monitoring feral cats in New Zealand. Animals 9, 687.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
O’Connor KM, Nathan LR, Liberati MR, Tingley MW, Vokoun JC, Rittenhouse TAG (2017) Camera trap arrays improve detection probability of wildlife: investigating study design considerations using an empirical dataset. PLoS ONE 12, e0175684.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Paton AJ, Buettel JC, Brook BW (2022) Evaluating scat surveys as a tool for population and community assessments. Wildlife Research 49, 206-214.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Pirie TJ, Thomas RL, Fellowes MDE (2016) Limitations to recording larger mammalian predators in savannah using camera traps and spoor. Wildlife Biology 22, 13-21.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Price CJ, Banks PB, Greggor AL (2019) What evidence exists on the effectiveness of different types of olfactory lures as attractants for invasive mammalian predators? A systematic map protocol. Environmental Evidence 8, 12.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Ragg JR, Mackintosh CG, Moller H (2000) The scavenging behaviour of ferrets (Mustela furo), feral cats (Felis domesticus), possums (Trichosurus vulpecula), hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus) and harrier hawks (Circus approximans) on pastoral farmland in New Zealand: implications for bovine tuberculosis transmission. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 48, 166-175.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Read JL, Bengsen AJ, Meek PD, Moseby KE (2015) How to snap your cat: optimum lures and their placement for attracting mammalian predators in arid Australia. Wildlife Research 42, 1-12.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Rees MW, Pascoe JH, Wintle BA, Le Pla M, Birnbaum EK, Hradsky BA (2019) Unexpectedly high densities of feral cats in a rugged temperate forest. Biological Conservation 239, 108287.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Rovero F, Zimmermann F, Berzi D, Meek P (2013) ‘Which camera trap type and how many do I need?’ A review of camera features and study designs for a range of wildlife research applications. Hystrix 24, 148-156.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Si X, Kays R, Ding P (2014) How long is enough to detect terrestrial animals? Estimating the minimum trapping effort on camera traps. PeerJ 2, e374.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Sievert O, Comley E, Phiri W, Davis RS (2023) Using camera traps to assess carcass use and the intraguild dynamics of understudied African mesocarnivores. Food Webs 36, e00287.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Stokeld D, Frank ASK, Hill B, Choy JL, Mahney T, Stevens A, Young S, Rangers D, Rangers W, Gillespie GR (2016) Multiple cameras required to reliably detect feral cats in northern Australian tropical savanna: an evaluation of sampling design when using camera traps. Wildlife Research 42, 642-649.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Tobajas J, Descalzo E, Mateo R, Ferreras P (2022) Using lures for improving selectivity of bait intake by red foxes. Wildlife Research 49, 129-136.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Tourani M, Brøste EN, Bakken S, Odden J, Bischof R (2020) Sooner, closer, or longer: detectability of mesocarnivores at camera traps. Journal of Zoology 312, 259-270.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Trolliet F, Vermeulen C, Huynen M-C, Hambuckers A (2014) Use of camera traps for wildlife studies. A review. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement 18, 446-454.
| Google Scholar |
Wearn OR, Glover-Kapfer P (2019) Snap happy: camera traps are an effective sampling tool when compared with alternative methods. Royal Society Open Science 6, 181748.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Wysong ML, Iacona GD, Valentine LE, Morris K, Ritchie EG (2020) On the right track: placement of camera traps on roads improves detection of predators and shows non-target impacts of feral cat baiting. Wildlife Research 47, 557-569.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
